Historicity[edit]

In modern scholarship, the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion are considered to be two historically certain facts about Jesus.[4][6] For example, James Dunn states that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent" and "rank so high on the 'almost impossible to doubt or deny' scale of historical facts" that they are often the starting points for the study of the historical Jesus.[4]Bart Ehrman states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontius Pilate is the most certain element about him.[7]John Dominic Crossan states that the crucifixion of Jesus is as certain as any historical fact can be.[8] Eddy and Boyd state that it is now "firmly established" that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.[9]Craig Blomberg states that most scholars in the third quest for the historical Jesus consider the crucifixion indisputable.[5]Christopher M. Tuckett states that, although the exact reasons for the death of Jesus are hard to determine, one of the indisputable facts about him is that he was crucified.[10]

While scholars agree on the historicity of the crucifixion, they differ on the reason and context for it, e.g., both E. P. Sanders and Paula Fredriksen support the historicity of the crucifixion, but contend that Jesus did not foretell his own crucifixion, and that his prediction of the crucifixion is a "church creation" (p. 126).[11]Geza Vermes also views the crucifixion as a historical event but provides his own explanation and background for it.[11]

John P. Meier views the crucifixion of Jesus as historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader.[12] Meier states that a number of other criteria, e.g., the criterion of multiple attestation (i.e., confirmation by more than one source), the criterion of coherence (i.e., that it fits with other historical elements) and the criterion of rejection (i.e., that it is not disputed by ancient sources) help establish the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical event.[13]

Although almost all ancient sources relating to crucifixion are literary, the 1968 archeological discovery just northeast of Jerusalem of the body of a crucified man dated to the 1st century provided good confirmatory evidence that crucifixions occurred during the Roman period roughly according to the manner in which the crucifixion of Jesus is described in the gospels.[14] The crucified man was identified as Yohan Ben Ha'galgol and probably died about 70 AD, around the time of the Jewish revolt against Rome. The analyses at the Hadassah Medical School estimated that he died in his late 20s. Another relevant archaeological find, which also dates to the 1st century AD, is an unidentified heel bone with a spike discovered in a Jerusalem gravesite, now held by the Israel Antiquities Authority and displayed in the Israel Museum.[15][16]

Gospel narratives[edit]

In the New Testament all four Gospels conclude with an extended narrative of Jesus' arrest, trial, crucifixion, burial, and accounts of resurrection. In each Gospel these five events in the life of Jesus are treated with more intense detail than any other portion of that Gospel's narrative. Scholars note that the reader receives an almost hour-by-hour account of what is happening.[17]:p.91 Christians have traditionally understood Jesus' death on the cross to be a knowing and willing sacrifice (in which he did not mount a defense in his trials) undertaken as an "agent of God" to atone for humanity's sin and make salvation possible.[18][19][20][21] Most Christians proclaim this sacrifice through the bread and wine of the Eucharist, as a remembrance of the Last Supper, and many also commemorate the event on Good Friday each year.[22][23]

Once at Golgotha, Jesus was offered wine mixed with gall to drink. Matthew's and Mark's Gospels record that he refused this. He was then crucified and hung between two convicted thieves. According to Mark's Gospel, he endured the torment of crucifixion for some six hours from the third hour, at approximately 9 am,[27] until his death at the ninth hour, corresponding to about 3 pm.[28] The soldiers affixed a sign above his head stating "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" in three languages, divided his garments and cast lots for his seamless robe. The Roman soldiers did not break Jesus' legs, as they did to the other two men crucified (breaking the legs hastened the crucifixion process), as Jesus was dead already. Each gospel has its own account of Jesus' last words, seven statements altogether.[29] In the Synoptic Gospels, various supernatural events accompany the crucifixion, including darkness, an earthquake, and (in Matthew) the resurrection of saints. Following Jesus' death, his body was removed from the cross by Joseph of Arimathea and buried in a rock-hewn tomb, with Nicodemus assisting.

Bronzino's depiction of the Crucifixion with 3 nails, no ropes, and a hypopodium standing support, c. 1545.

According to all four gospels, Jesus was brought to the "Place of a Skull"[30] and crucified with two thieves,[31] with the charge of claiming to be "King of the Jews",[32] and the soldiers divided his clothes[33] before he bowed his head and died.[34] Following his death, Joseph of Arimathea requested the body from Pilate,[35] which Joseph then placed in a new garden tomb.[36]

Luke is the only gospel writer to omit the detail of sour wine mix that was offered to Jesus on a reed,[45] while only Mark and John describe Joseph actually taking the body down off the cross.[46]

There are several details that are only found in one of the gospel accounts. For instance, only Matthew's gospel mentions an earthquake, resurrected saints who went to the city and that Roman soldiers were assigned to guard the tomb,[47] while Mark is the only one to state the actual time of the crucifixion (the third hour, or 9 am) and the centurion's report of Jesus' death.[48] The Gospel of Luke's unique contributions to the narrative include Jesus' words to the women who were mourning, one criminal's rebuke of the other, the reaction of the multitudes who left "beating their breasts", and the women preparing spices and ointments before resting on the Sabbath.[49] John is also the only one to refer to the request that the legs be broken and the soldier's subsequent piercing of Jesus' side (as fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy), as well as that Nicodemus assisted Joseph with burial.[50]

According to the canonical Gospels, Jesus rose from the dead "on the third day" (counting the day of crucifixion as the first) and appeared to his disciples on different occasions before ascending to heaven.[51] The account given in Acts of the Apostles, which says Jesus remained with the apostles for forty days, appears to differ from the account in the Gospel of Luke, which makes no clear distinction between the events of Easter Sunday and the Ascension.[52][53] However, most biblical scholars agree that St. Luke also wrote the Acts of the Apostles as a follow-up volume to his Gospel account, and the two works must be considered as a whole.[54]

In Mark, Jesus is crucified along with two rebels, and the day goes dark for three hours.[55] Jesus calls out to God, then gives a shout and dies.[55] The curtain of the Temple is torn in two.[55] Matthew follows Mark, adding an earthquake and the resurrection of saints.[56] Luke also follows Mark, though he describes the rebels as common criminals, one of whom defends Jesus, who in turn promises that he (Jesus) and the criminal will be together in paradise.[57] Luke portrays Jesus as impassive in the face of his crucifixion.[58] John includes several of the same elements as those found in Mark, though they are treated differently.[59]

Other accounts and references[edit]

An early non-Christian reference to the crucifixion of Jesus is likely to be Mara Bar-Serapion's letter to his son, written sometime after AD 73 but before the 3rd century AD.[60][61][62] The letter includes no Christian themes and the author is presumed to be a pagan.[60][61][63] The letter refers to the retributions that followed the unjust treatment of three wise men: Socrates, Pythagoras, and "the wise king" of the Jews.[60][62] Some scholars see little doubt that the reference to the execution of the "king of the Jews" is about the crucifixion of Jesus, while others place less value in the letter, given the possible ambiguity in the reference.[63][64]

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, ... He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles ... And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross ...

Most modern scholars agree that while this Josephus passage (called the Testimonium Flavianum) includes some later interpolations, it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate.[66][67][68] It is notable that Josephus and other historians didn't live during Jesus' lifetime. James Dunn states that there is "broad consensus" among scholars regarding the nature of an authentic reference to the crucifixion of Jesus in the Testimonium.[69]

Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.

Scholars generally consider the Tacitus reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate to be genuine, and of historical value as an independent Roman source.[70][73][74][75][76][77] Eddy and Boyd state that it is now "firmly established" that Tacitus provides a non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.[9]

On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!

Although the question of the equivalence of the identities of Yeshu and Jesus has at times been debated, many historians agree that the above 2nd-century passage is likely to be about Jesus, Peter Schäfer stating that there can be no doubt that this narrative of the execution in the Talmud refers to Jesus of Nazareth.[78]Robert Van Voorst states that the Sanhedrin 43a reference to Jesus can be confirmed not only from the reference itself, but from the context that surrounds it.[79]

In opposition to the vast majority of Biblical and mainstream scholarship, Muslims maintain that Jesus was not crucified and that those who thought they had killed him had mistakenly killed Judas Iscariot, Simon of Cyrene, or someone else in his place.[80] They hold this belief based on various interpretations of Quran4:157–158, which states: "they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them [or it appeared so unto them], ... Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself".[80]

Some early Christian Gnostic sects, believing Jesus did not have a physical substance, denied that he was crucified.[81][82] In response, Ignatius of Antioch insisted that Jesus was truly born and was truly crucified and wrote that those who held that Jesus only seemed to suffer only seemed to be Christians.[83][84]

Chronology[edit]

There is no consensus regarding the exact date of the crucifixion of Jesus, although it is generally agreed by biblical scholars that it was on a Friday on or near Passover (Nisan 15), during the governorship of Pontius Pilate (who ruled AD 26–36).[85] Scholars have provided estimates for the year of crucifixion in the range 30–33 AD,[86][87][88] with the majority of modern scholars favouring the date April 7, 30 AD.[89][90] Another popular date is Friday, April 3, 33 AD.[91][92]

Since an observational calendar was used during the time of Jesus, including an ascertainment of the new moon and ripening barley harvest, the exact day or even month for Passover in a given year is subject to speculation.[93][94][not in citation given]. Various approaches have been used to estimate the year of the crucifixion, including the canonical Gospels, the chronology of the life of Paul, as well as different astronomical models.

The consensus of modern scholarship is that the New Testament accounts represent a crucifixion occurring on a Friday, but a Thursday or Wednesday crucifixion have also been proposed.[95][96] Some scholars explain a Thursday crucifixion based on a "double sabbath" caused by an extra Passover sabbath falling on Thursday dusk to Friday afternoon, ahead of the normal weekly Sabbath.[95][97] Some have argued that Jesus was crucified on Wednesday, not Friday, on the grounds of the mention of "three days and three nights" in Matthew before his resurrection, celebrated on Sunday. Others have countered by saying that this ignores the Jewish idiom by which a "day and night" may refer to any part of a 24-hour period, that the expression in Matthew is idiomatic, not a statement that Jesus was 72 hours in the tomb, and that the many references to a resurrection on the third day do not require three literal nights.[95][98]

In Mark 15:25 crucifixion takes place at the third hour (9 a.m.) and Jesus' death at the ninth hour (3 p.m.).[99] However, in John 19:14 Jesus is still before Pilate at the sixth hour.[100] Scholars have presented a number of arguments to deal with the issue, some suggesting a reconciliation, e.g., based on the use of Roman timekeeping in John but not in Mark, yet others have rejected the arguments.[100][101][102] Several notable scholars have argued that the modern precision of marking the time of day should not be read back into the gospel accounts, written at a time when no standardization of timepieces, or exact recording of hours and minutes was available, and time was often approximated to the closest three-hour period.[100][103][104]

Luke's gospel also describes an interaction between Jesus and the women among the crowd of mourners following him, quoting Jesus as saying "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say, 'Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!' Then they will begin to say to the mountains, 'Fall on us,' and to the hills, 'Cover us.' For if they do these things when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?"[Lk. 23:28-31]

The Gospel of Luke has Jesus address these women as "daughters of Jerusalem", thus distinguishing them from the women whom the same gospel describes as "the women who had followed him from Galilee" and who were present at his crucifixion.[106]

Calvary as an English name for the place is derived from the Latin word for skull (calvaria), which is used in the Vulgate translation of "place of a skull", the explanation given in all four Gospels of the Aramaic word Gûlgaltâ which was the name of the place where Jesus was crucified.[113] The text does not indicate why it was so designated, but several theories have been put forward. One is that as a place of public execution, Calvary may have been strewn with the skulls of abandoned victims (which would be contrary to Jewish burial traditions, but not Roman). Another is that Calvary is named after a nearby cemetery (which is consistent with both of the proposed modern sites). A third is that the name was derived from the physical contour, which would be more consistent with the singular use of the word, i.e., the place of "a skull". While often referred to as "Mount Calvary", it was more likely a small hill or rocky knoll.[114]

The traditional site, inside what is now occupied by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the Christian Quarter of the Old City, has been attested since the 4th century. A second site (commonly referred to as Gordon's Calvary[115] ), located further north of the Old City near a place popularly called the Garden Tomb, has been promoted since the 19th century, mostly by Protestants.

People present[edit]

The dead Christ with the Virgin, John the Evangelist and Mary Magdalene. Unknown painter of the 18th century

The Gospel of Matthew describes many women at the crucifixion, some of whom are named in the Gospels. Apart from these women, the three Synoptic Gospels speak of the presence of others: "the chief priests, with the scribes and elders";[116] two robbers crucified, one on Jesus' right and one on his left,[117] whom the Gospel of Luke presents as the penitent thief and the impenitent thief;[118] "the soldiers",[119] "the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus";[120] passers-by;[121] "bystanders",[122] "the crowds that had assembled for this spectacle";[123] and "his acquaintances"[124]

Method and manner[edit]

Whereas most Christians believe the gibbet on which Jesus was executed was the traditional two-beamed cross, debate exists regarding the view that a single upright stake was used. The Greek and Latin words used in the earliest Christian writings are ambiguous. The Koine Greek terms used in the New Testament are stauros (σταυρός) and xylon (ξύλον). The latter means wood (a live tree, timber or an object constructed of wood); in earlier forms of Greek, the former term meant an upright stake or pole, but in Koine Greek it was used also to mean a cross.[129] The Latin word crux was also applied to objects other than a cross.[130]

However, early Christians writers who speak of the shape of the particular gibbet on which Jesus died invariably describe it as having a cross-beam. For instance, the Epistle of Barnabas, which was certainly earlier than 135,[131] and may have been of the 1st century AD,[132] the time when the gospel accounts of the death of Jesus were written, likened it to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300),[133] and to the position assumed by Moses in Exodus 17:11–12.[134]Justin Martyr (100–165) explicitly says the cross of Christ was of two-beam shape: "That lamb which was commanded to be wholly roasted was a symbol of the suffering of the cross which Christ would undergo. For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of the cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb."[135]Irenaeus, who died around the end of the 2nd century, speaks of the cross as having "five extremities, two in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle, on which [last] the person rests who is fixed by the nails."[136] For other witnesses to how early Christians envisaged the shape of the gibbet used for Jesus, see Dispute about Jesus' execution method.

The assumption of the use of a two-beamed cross does not determine the number of nails used in the crucifixion and some theories suggest three nails while others suggest four nails.[137] However, throughout history larger numbers of nails have been hypothesized, at times as high as 14 nails.[138] These variations are also present in the artistic depictions of the crucifixion.[139] In the Western Church, before the Renaissance usually four nails would be depicted, with the feet side by side. After the Renaissance most depictions use three nails, with one foot placed on the other.[139] Nails are almost always depicted in art, although Romans sometimes just tied the victims to the cross.[139] The tradition also carries to Christian emblems, e.g. the Jesuits use three nails under the IHS monogram and a cross to symbolize the crucifixion.[140]

The placing of the nails in the hands, or the wrists is also uncertain. Some theories suggest that the Greek word cheir (χειρ) for hand includes the wrist and that the Romans were generally trained to place nails through Destot's space (between the capitate and lunate bones) without fracturing any bones.[141] Another theory suggests that the Greek word for hand also includes the forearm and that the nails were placed near the radius and ulna of the forearm.[142] Ropes may have also been used to fasten the hands in addition to the use of nails.[143]

Another issue has been the use of a hypopodium as a standing platform to support the feet, given that the hands may not have been able to support the weight. In the 17th century Rasmus Bartholin considered a number of analytical scenarios of that topic.[138] In the 20th century, forensic pathologist Frederick Zugibe performed a number of crucifixion experiments by using ropes to hang human subjects at various angles and hand positions.[142] His experiments support an angled suspension, and a two-beamed cross, and perhaps some form of foot support, given that in an Aufbinden form of suspension from a straight stake (as used by the Nazis in the Dachau concentration camp during World War II), death comes rather quickly.[144]

Words of Jesus spoken from the cross[edit]

The New Testament gives three different accounts of the words of Jesus on the cross. In Mark and Matthew Jesus utters only one saying on the cross, while Luke and John each describe three statements unique to them.[145]

The only words of Jesus on the cross in the Mark and Matthew accounts, this is a quotation of Psalm 22. Since other verses of the same Psalm are cited in the crucifixion accounts, it is often considered a literary and theological creation. Geza Vermes, however, points out that the verse is cited in Aramaic rather than the Hebrew in which it usually would have been recited, and suggests that by the time of Jesus, this phrase had become a proverbial saying in common usage.[146] Compared to the accounts in the other Gospels, which he describes as 'theologically correct and reassuring', he considers this phrase 'unexpected, disquieting and in consequence more probable'.[147] He describes it as bearing 'all the appearances of a genuine cry'.[148]Raymond Brown likewise comments that he finds 'no persuasive argument against attributing to the Jesus of Mark/Matt the literal sentiment of feeling forsaken expressed in the Psalm quote'.[149]

Luke

"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." [Some early manuscripts do not have this][Lk. 23:34]

"Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."[Lk. 23:43]

The Gospel of Luke does not have the cry of Jesus found within Matthew and Mark, possibly playing down the suffering of Jesus and replacing a cry of desperation with one of hope and confidence, in keeping with the message of the Gospel which Jesus as dying confident that he would be vindicated as God's righteous prophet.[150]

The words of Jesus on the cross, especially his last words, have been the subject of a wide range of Christian teachings and sermons, and a number of authors have written books specifically devoted to the last sayings of Christ.[151][152][153][154][155][156] The difference between the accounts is cited by James Dunn as a reason to doubt their historicity.[157]

Reported extraordinary occurrences[edit]

The synoptics report various miraculous events during the crucifixion.[158][159] Mark mentions darkness in the daytime during Jesus' crucifixion, and the Temple veil being torn in two when Jesus dies.[55] Luke follows Mark;[57] as does Matthew, adding an earthquake and the resurrection of dead saints.[56] No mention of any of these appears in John.[160]

Darkness[edit]

In the synoptic narrative, while Jesus is hanging on the cross, the sky over Judea (or the whole world) is "darkened for three hours," from the sixth to the ninth hour (noon to mid-afternoon).

Some Christian writers considered the possibility that pagan commentators may have mentioned this event, mistaking it for a solar eclipse - although this would have been impossible during the Passover, which takes place at the full moon. Roman orator Julius Africanus and Christian theologian Origen refer to Greek historian Phlegon,who lived in the 2nd century AD, as having written "with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place"[161]

Julius Africanus further refers to the writings of historian Thallus: "This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Saviour falls on the day before the passover; but an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun."[162] A solar eclipse concurrent with a full moon is a scientific impossibility. Christian apologist Tertullian wrote "In the same hour, too, the light of day was withdrawn, when the sun at the very time was in his meridian blaze. Those who were not aware that this had been predicted about Christ, no doubt thought it an eclipse. You yourselves have the account of the world-portent still in your archives."[163]

Humphreys and Waddington of Oxford University considered the possibility that a lunar, rather than solar, eclipse might have taken place, visible for thirty minutes after sunset.[164][165] They concluded that:

"This eclipse was visible from Jerusalem at moonrise ... first visible from Jerusalem at about 6:20pm (the start of the Jewish Sabbath and also the start of Passover day in A.D. 33) with about 20% of its disc in the umbra of the earth's shadow ... The eclipse finished some thirty minutes later at 6:50pm."

Moreover, their calculations showed that the 20% umbra shadow was positioned close to the leading edge, the first visible portion at moonrise. These authors note that the Apostle Peter's reference to a "moon of blood"[Acts 2:20] (a term commonly used for a lunar eclipse because of the reddish color of the light refracted onto the moon through the Earth's atmosphere) may be a reference to this eclipse. It should be noted, however, that in the preceding verse of the same passage, Peter expressly mentions that "the sun shall be turned to darkness", which would suggest a solar eclipse in conjunction with the lunar one.[Acts 2:20] They claim that the failure of any of the gospel accounts to refer to a lunar eclipse is the result of a scribe wrongly amending a text, a claim historian David Henige describes as 'indefensible'.[166] Astronomer Bradley Schaefer points out that the lunar eclipse would not have been visible during daylight hours.[167][168]

Temple veil, earthquake and resurrection of dead saints[edit]

The synoptic gospels state that the veil of the temple was torn from top to bottom. According to Josephus, the curtain in Herod's temple would have been nearly 60 feet (18 m) high and 4 inches (100 mm) thick. According to Hebrews 9:1-10, this curtain was representative of the separation between God and man, beyond which only the High Priest was permitted to pass, and then only once each year[cf. Ex. 30:10] to enter into God's presence and make atonement for the sins of Israel. [Lev. 16] Many Bible expositors agree that the rending of the veil is symbolic of Jesus establishing a new and living way of access to God[Heb. 9:11-15], see New Covenant.

The Gospel of Matthew states that there were earthquakes, splitting rocks, and the graves of dead saints were opened (and subsequently resurrected after the resurrection of Jesus). These resurrected saints went into the holy city and appeared to many people, but their subsequent fate is never elaborated upon.[Mt. 27:51–53]

Medical aspects[edit]

A number of theories that attempt to explain the circumstances of the death of Jesus on the cross have been proposed by a range of people, including physicians, historians and even mystics. In 2006, general practitioner John Scotson reviewed over 40 publications on the cause of death of Jesus and theories ranged from cardiac rupture to pulmonary embolism.[169]

As early as 1847, drawing on John 19:34, physician William Stroud proposed the ruptured heart theory of the cause of Christ's death and it influenced a number of other people.[170][171] The asphyxia theory has been the subject of several experiments that simulate crucifixion in healthy volunteers and many physicians agree that crucifixion causes a profound disruption of the victim's ability to breathe. A side effect of exhaustive asphyxia is that the crucifixion victim will gradually find it more and more challenging to obtain enough breath to speak. This provides a possible explanation for the accounts that the last words of Christ were short utterances.[172]

The cardiovascular collapse theory is a prevalent modern explanation and suggests that Jesus died of profound shock. According to this theory, the scourging, the beatings, and the fixing to the cross would have left Jesus dehydrated, weak, and critically ill and that the stage was set for a complex interplay of simultaneous physiological insults: dehydration, massive trauma and soft tissue injury (especially from the prior scourging), inadequate respiration, and strenuous physical exertion, leading to cardiovascular collapse.[173][174]

In his book The Crucifixion of Jesus, physician and forensic pathologistFrederick Zugibe provides a set of theories that attempt to explain the nailing, pains and death of Jesus in great detail.[177][178] Zugibe carried out a number of experiments over several years to test his theories while he was a medical examiner.[179] These studies included experiments in which volunteers with specific weights were hanging at specific angles and the amount of pull on each hand was measured, in cases where the feet were also secured or not. In these cases the amount of pull and the corresponding pain was found to be significant.[179]

Pierre Barbet, a French physician, and the chief surgeon at Saint Joseph's Hospital in Paris,[180] advanced a set of detailed theories on the death of Jesus. He hypothesized that Jesus would have had to relax his muscles to obtain enough air to utter his last words, in the face of exhaustion asphyxia. Barbet hypothesized that a crucified person would have to use his pierced feet to lift his body in order to obtain enough breath to speak.[181] Some of Barbet's theories, e.g., location of nails, are disputed by Zugibe.

Ophthalmologist and pastor C. Truman Davis also published a physician's view of the crucifixion, agreeing with Barbet, but his analysis is far less detailed than Zugibe.[182]

In 2003, historians FP Retief and L Cilliers reviewed the history and pathology of crucifixion as performed by the Romans and suggested that the cause of death was often a combination of factors. They also state that Roman guards were prohibited from leaving the scene until death had occurred.[186]

A central element in the Christology presented in the Acts of the Apostles is the affirmation of the belief that the death of Jesus by crucifixion happened "with the foreknowledge of God, according to a definite plan".[192] In this view, as in Acts 2:23, the cross is not viewed as a scandal, for the crucifixion of Jesus "at the hands of the lawless" is viewed as the fulfilment of the plan of God.[192][193]

Paul's Christology has a specific focus on the death and resurrection of Jesus. For Paul, the crucifixion of Jesus is directly related to his resurrection and the term "the cross of Christ" used in Galatians 6:12 may be viewed as his abbreviation of the message of the gospels.[194] For Paul, the crucifixion of Jesus was not an isolated event in history, but a cosmic event with significant eschatological consequences, as in 1 Corinthians 2:8.[194] In the Pauline view, Jesus, obedient to the point of death (Philippians 2:8) died "at the right time" (Romans 4:25) based on the plan of God.[194] For Paul the "power of the cross" is not separable from the Resurrection of Jesus.[194]

However, the belief in the redemptive nature of Jesus' death predates the Pauline letters and goes back to the earliest days of Christianity and the Jerusalem church.[195] The Nicene Creed's statement that "for our sake he was crucified" is a reflection of this core belief's formalization in the fourth century.[196]

John Calvin supported the "agent of God" Christology and argued that in his trial in Pilate's Court Jesus could have successfully argued for his innocence, but instead submitted to crucifixion in obedience to the Father.[19][197] This Christological theme continued into the 20th century, both in the Eastern and Western Churches. In the Eastern Church Sergei Bulgakov argued that the crucifixion of Jesus was "pre-eternally" determined by the Father before the creation of the world, to redeem humanity from the disgrace caused by the fall of Adam.[21] In the Western Church, Karl Rahner elaborated on the analogy that the blood of the Lamb of God (and the water from the side of Jesus) shed at the crucifixion had a cleansing nature, similar to baptismal water.[198]

Among Eastern Orthodox Christians, another common view is Christus Victor.[205] This holds that Jesus was sent by God to defeat death and Satan. Because of his perfection, voluntary death, and Resurrection, Jesus defeated Satan and death, and arose victorious. Therefore, humanity was no longer bound in sin, but was free to rejoin God through faith in Jesus.[206]

Islam[edit]

Islamic texts categorically deny the idea of crucifixion or death attributed to Jesus (Isa) by the New Testament.[207][208] The Quran states that people (i.e., the Jews and Romans) sought to kill Jesus, but they did not crucify or kill him, although "this was made to appear to them".

"And they said we have killed the Messiah Isa son of Maryam, the Messenger of God. They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, though it was made to appear like that to them; those that disagreed about him are full of doubt, with no knowledge to follow, only supposition: they certainly did not kill him. On the contrary, God raised him unto himself. God is almighty and wise."

Contrary to Christian teachings, Islam teaches Jesus ascended to Heaven without being put on the cross, but that God transformed another person to appear exactly like him and to be then crucified instead of him. (According to Irenaeus, the 2nd-century AlexandrianGnosticBasilides gave a similar account.)[210] Isa ascended bodily to Heaven, there to remain until his Second Coming in the End Days.

Devotions based on the process of crucifixion, and the sufferings of Jesus are followed by various Christians. The Stations of the Cross follows a number of stages based on the stages involved in the crucifixion of Jesus, while the Rosary of the Holy Wounds is used to meditate on the wounds of Jesus as part of the crucifixion .

References[edit]

^Eddy & Boyd (2007) The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition Baker Academic, ISBN 0-8010-3114-1 page 127 states that it is now "firmly established" that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.

^Crossan, John Dominic (1995). Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. HarperOne. p. 145. ISBN0-06-061662-8. "That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus ... agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact."

^Matthew 27:33 - "place called Golgotha (which means Place of a Skull)"; Mark 15:22 (same as Matthew); Luke 23:32-33 - "place that is called The Skull"; John 19:17 - "place called The Place of a Skull, which in Aramaic is called Golgotha"

^Matthew 27:37 - "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews."; Mark 15:26 - "The King of the Jews."; Luke 23:38 - "This is the King of the Jews." Some manuscripts add in letters of Greek and Latin and Hebrew; John 19:19-22 - "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews." "... it was written in Aramaic, in Latin, and in Greek."

^Tacitus' characterization of "Christian abominations" may have been based on the rumors in Rome that during the Eucharist rituals Christians ate the body and drank the blood of their God, interpreting the symbolic ritual as cannibalism by Christians. References: Ancient Rome by William E. Dunstan 2010 ISBN 0-7425-6833-4 page 293 and An introduction to the New Testament and the origins of Christianity by Delbert Royce Burkett 2002 ISBN 0-521-00720-8 page 485

^The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament by Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum 2009 ISBN 978-0-8054-4365-3 pages 142–143

^Cyclopaedia of Biblical, theological, and ecclesiastical literature: Volume 7 John McClintock, James Strong - 1894 "... he lay in the grave on the 15th (which was a 'high day' or double Sabbath, because the weekly Sabbath coincided ..."

^Eucherius of Lyon. "Letter to the Presbyter Faustus". "The three more frequented exit gates are one on the west, another on the east, and a third on the north. As you enter the city from the northern side, the first of the holy places due to the condition of the directions of the streets is to the church which is called the Martyrium, which was by Constantine with great reverence not long ago built up. Next, to the west one visits the connecting places Golgotha and the Anastasis; indeed the Anastasis is in the place of the resurrection, and Golgotha is in the middle between the Anastasis and the Martyrium, the place of the Lord's passion, in which still appears that rock which once endured the very cross on which the Lord was. These are however separated places outside of Mount Sion, where the failing rise of the place extended itself to the north."

^For a discussion of the date of the work, see Information on Epistle of Barnabas and Andrew C. Clark, "Apostleship: Evidence from the New Testament and Early Christian Literature," Evangelical Review of Theology, 1989, Vol. 13, p. 380

^"The Spirit saith to the heart of Moses, that he should make a type of the cross and of Him that was to suffer, that unless, saith He, they shall set their hope on Him, war shall be waged against them for ever. Moses therefore pileth arms one upon another in the midst of the encounter, and standing on higher ground than any he stretched out his hands, and so Israel was again victorious" (Epistle of Barnabas, 12:2-3).

^The Physical Death Of Jesus Christ, Study by The Mayo Clinic citing studies by Bucklin R (The legal and medical aspects of the trial and death of Christ. Sci Law 1970; 10:14–26), Mikulicz-Radeeki FV (The chest wound in the crucified Christ. Med News 1966; 14:30–40), Davis CT (The Crucifixion of Jesus: The passion of Christ from a medical point of view. Ariz Med 1965; 22:183-187), and Barbet P (A Doctor at Calvary: The Passion of Out Lord Jesus Christ as Described by a Surgeon, Earl of Wicklow (trans) Garden City, NY, Doubleday Image Books 1953, pp 12–18, 37–147, 159–175, 187–208).

^"Wherefore he did not himself suffer death, but Simon, a certain man of Cyrene, being compelled, bore the cross in his stead; so that this latter being transfigured by him, that he might be thought to be Jesus, was crucified, through ignorance and error, while Jesus himself received the form of Simon, and, standing by, laughed at them. For since he was an incorporeal power, and the Nous (mind) of the unborn father, he transfigured himself as he pleased, and thus ascended to him who had sent him, deriding them, inasmuch as he could not be laid hold of, and was invisible to all" (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book I, ch. 24, 4).